Reasonable restrictions and the terrorist watch list

As we all know, rights are subject to reasonable restrictions, particularly when the public interest and common good are at stake. So in order to ensure the security of our free state, there are several programs that must be extended immediately.

Daesh/ISIS poses a grave threat to our commonwealth. Although they do not have the prototypical military force that has the ability to strike on American soil, they use unconventional tactics to do damage here and abroad, as we’ve seen recently with the horrors in France. To combat these terrorists, our own tactics must constantly be adjusted to face these ever-changing threats. So with this in mind, new protections for our citizens must be enacted immediately.

As part of the NDAA, the following revisions are proposed:

Terrorists are using social media, mosques, email, and in person communications to plan horrific violence against our country. Therefore anyone on the terrorist watch list no longer requires a warrant for surveillance by any police or federal agency.

Additionally, due to the severity of the threat, anyone on the aforementioned list can be detained without charges indefinitely. The watch list is constantly reviewed for errors, and incorrect entries are removed, so only individuals that are a genuine threat to the nation’s security are included.

All articles involving Daesh/ISIS are required to be reviewed and approved by special agents with Homeland Security. Our press has to be vigilant against all appearances of extremist propaganda, and cannot be seen as a recruiting tool for these terrorists.

All those held under revision 2 above fall under military law, and the trials afforded to them according to the military rules of justice. For the purpose of holding prisoners under this amendment, Guantanamo Bay will remain open and additional funding for expansion will be set aside.

To preserve the integrity of our commonwealth and ensure the elections process isn’t subverted by terrorists, anyone on the terrorist watch list will have their vote removed automatically with no notification. This will be done through a private partnership with Diebold, one of the largest voting machine manufacturers in the United States.

Although the percentage of extremists is low among the Muslim community, in the current state of global terrorism, an overwhelming majority of terrorists hail from this religion. In order to ensure the security of our great country, the practice of Islam is prohibited. Those found in violation are all subject without question to the 6 amendments above.

Pretty absurd isn’t it? Sadly, some of the above has happened already in this country. Warrantless wiretapping, indefinite detainment, and military justice for civilians were all part of the initial “war on terror”. As liberals, (not the authoritarian types that unfortunately have found their way into leadership positions in the house and senate) we very rightly decried these steps as unconstitutional and horrific violations of an individuals rights.

It’s taken years, but some of the above has been pulled back a bit, and obviously some of the above is hyperbole on how bad it could get if taken to a further extreme. I would hazard a guess that most of the folks who are reading this article would be appalled and very vocally against the 6 proposals above, and rightly so.

So how is it that the seventh revision hasn’t had the same kind of outcry? Where is our liberal sensibilities on this proposal? Oh wait. I forgot to include the 7th one. Here it is:

With the danger posed by extremists, all individuals on the aforementioned terrorist watch list are immediately disqualified from purchasing or possessing a handgun or long gun.

So with the 7 revisions listed, we’ve now violated 6 out of 10 on the Bill of Rights, as well as the 15th amendment among other gross violations of civil rights. Whether you are pro-gun or anti-gun, it’s intellectually dishonest to support a list that strips the rights of individuals, regardless of whether or not you personally agree with the right itself. As the old adage goes, two wrongs don’t make a right.

A secret list with no accountability or ability to petition for removal is terrifying. Supporting it’s continued existence and usage to track and remove the rights of our citizens is disgusting. Don’t let your disdain for one right allow you to be pulled into supporting something that is this disturbing.

Senorgrand had some opinions about this as well, but I wanted to toss my $.01 in.